by james_woods 205 Replies latest jw experiences
critically examining historical figures is not a bad thing and in al honesty, if we were related to these patients:
i doubt we'd view mother teresa as a saint. i wouldn't.
i didn't realise they were running needles under cold tap water. that's just nuts. and what's with not sending the treatable to hospitals?
Allow me to be the saints advocate, perhaps there was no hospitals in the area, and perhaps the only had aspirins?
at first i was thinking that. i might have even posted that on here.
yet she raised tons of money.
if all we're tlking about are aspirins and cheap meds, why couldn't they at least buy THAT?
there's another story where they'd rip out all of the creature comforts in rooms. why? so everyone would suffer in christ's name or some silliness like that. i think it's in that link.
nuns didn't even get heat in the winter. some apparently developed tuberculosis.
even if there weren't shiny, weestern style hospitals...i'd have respect for her if she at least used some of that money to run simple clinics. you look at doctors without borders...no way they wouldn't have helped if they could. she's mother teresa after all. who wouldn't want to ally themselves with her?
the money flow is bothering me. it's like donating to the watchtower. if the money isn't going to actualy help the poor...where's it going?
RBIH: I realize my justification stand and fall with MT having spread her operation to thinly. If she actually had money but choose to send them home to the church rather than spend them on painkillers, well..
Allow me to be the saints advocate, perhaps there was no hospitals in the area, and perhaps the only had aspirins?
In the case of the boy with the kidney problem, it sounded like a hospital WAS an option. Their reply was not that there was no available help, but if you did it for one you'd have to do it for all. The boy was dying because they refused to distinguish between treatable and untreatable diseases. Perhaps if MT had not got her hands on the boy, he could have been taken somewhere where he would have received the proper care.
I realize my justification stand and fall with MT having spread her operation to thinly. If she actually had money but choose to send them home to the church rather than spend them on painkillers, well..
i figured you thought of that. i like devil's advocates though. i've heard that there were criticisms before, never really thought about it. so some of this is pretty new to me.
i can understand someone spreading an operation too thin. if i were her, i could see myself doing that simply because i'd try to help everyone i could.
but at the very least, if she spreads her organization too thin, she could have still bought some cheap pain meds. ruling them out is cruel.
the pain is "jesus kissing you"?
i just can't imagine.
In the case of the boy with the kidney problem, it sounded like a hospital WAS an option. Their reply was not that there was no available help, but if you did it for one you'd have to do it for all. The boy was dying because they refused to distinguish between treatable and untreatable diseases. Perhaps if MT had not got her hands on the boy, he could have been taken somewhere where he would have received the proper care.
not only was it an option, but at first, itsounded like it was easily treatable. at first, he needed certain medications i believe. later he needed surgery. then it was too late. so if the dr is begging to take the child to the hospital and the nuns are refusing because that was against the rules, that's inexcusable.
Why even take in people you cannot care for?
, itsounded like it was easily treatable.
With antibiotics. But that wouldn't have fit in with the glorified suffering she pushed. Tragic.
